Can stage yellow support the death penalty?

[Tyler Robinson]

So humanitarian considerations should be thrown out the window in lieu for an option that appears cheaper? 

Well done. 

 

[puporing]

Most humans are only capable of doing the best they can to defend themselves and reduce harm overall which is their right to do. 

But most humans are not suited for or capable of the task of delivering "real justice":

Real justice is “served” through being made fully aware of what has occurred and the consequences of one’s actions exposed, through the internal realizations and radical transformation in consciousness that may occur from within the doer and everyone around by the “grace of God”, through cutting through falsehood and moving toward Truth, through a rebirth in consciousness.

"Real justice" leads everyone closer to God.

[Danioover9000]

@Tyler Robinson

2 minutes ago, Tyler Robinson said:

So humanitarian considerations should be thrown out the window in lieu for an option that appears cheaper? 

Well done. 

 

   It's taking into consideration of the living spaces, materials for the construction of each part of a prison facility, tax payer money per year that pays for funding for every equipment and maintenance costs, paying for the use of the phone, funding for food and water supply for inmates with or without parole,versus those that are on death row. American prison system is notoriously pretty expensive, and they do try to make a profit for each incarnation they do.

   Humanitarian considerations are not limitless in the face of cannibals, psychopaths, sociopaths, rapists, child murderers and paedophiles. Housing extremely degenerate humans that chronically wish ill will and harm to other good samaritans and civilians in society, while putting police officers, nurses, doctors, wardens, and other people that have to manage and deal with such evil for decades at risk of getting hurt or killed, while having to pay more taxes of keeping such devils alive, is the greater collective harm. The humane thing for such types of people, is to kill them off quickly when enough evidence is gathered that they clearly have intent for degeneracy, and harm to others, and strong desire to continue until death regardless.

[Danioover9000]

   This is especially the case if such individuals are hell bent to fulfill a mision of destroying parts, or society as a whole, at the cost of thousands and many more suffering greater misery and are actively pursuing that goal.

[Tyler Robinson]

37 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

@Tyler Robinson

   It's taking into consideration of the living spaces, materials for the construction of each part of a prison facility, tax payer money per year that pays for funding for every equipment and maintenance costs, paying for the use of the phone, funding for food and water supply for inmates with or without parole,versus those that are on death row. American prison system is notoriously pretty expensive, and they do try to make a profit for each incarnation they do.

   Humanitarian considerations are not limitless in the face of cannibals, psychopaths, sociopaths, rapists, child murderers and paedophiles. Housing extremely degenerate humans that chronically wish ill will and harm to other good samaritans and civilians in society, while putting police officers, nurses, doctors, wardens, and other people that have to manage and deal with such evil for decades at risk of getting hurt or killed, while having to pay more taxes of keeping such devils alive, is the greater collective harm. The humane thing for such types of people, is to kill them off quickly when enough evidence is gathered that they clearly have intent for degeneracy, and harm to others, and strong desire to continue until death regardless.

This take is purely based on selfishness and monetary considerations. 

Money is not important. Life is. 

If you thought every life is equally important then you wouldn't think this way. 

If your child was in prison, you certainly would never want your child to be put to death. 

You act like you're saving the society. By killing someone we get nothing. 

Do you realize that sometimes it's the prison guards and wardens abuse their power and rape these criminals. 

You're only judging them off the labels thrown at them. To think that someone is beyond healing and redemption is ludicrous. 

The criminal justice system is extremely corrupt as someone stated above. It's not so black and white as your stage Orange lenses make it out to be. 

So think twice before jumping on the bandwagon. When we show empathy, it boomerangs back to us. Show love and it will come back. Show judgement and hate and it will come back too.

You're not in the shoes of criminals. Don't be too quick to judge. Most people who apply for a job of a police officer or a jail warden are actually very narcissistic and power hungry people who use these jobs as badges of honor rather than duty. 

How many cops have slaughtered unarmed people in the line of duty and gotten away with it, simply because they're cops. Should we call them licensed criminals, because that's what they are? 

Understand that any criminal is always at the receiving end of our judgement/mercy. They can't decide anything for themselves because they are powerless to do so. We as a collective society get to decide the course of their life, and as such we are required to exercise caution. One mistake can put an innocent person to death. 

Also if we decide to kill a person, how are we different from the criminal? We also did what they did, the only difference being we used some moral justification for it. 

We should not have the right to abuse someone because they abused someone else. We don't know what systemic factors were at play behind their crimes. 

And why are you so hell bent on thinking that criminals are simply incapable of rehabilitation and redemption? Where is your scientific reasoning or analysis or data for this? When was it proved that criminals were beyond repair? Who has proved it? 

So much of what you say is a Stage Green shadow, speculative conjecture and hypothesizing with no real evidence to back up your claims. 

There aren't too many incidents of criminals attacking nurses or guards etc. Especially on prison grounds. The reason is simple. The prisoners are sent to solitary confinement and much worse conditions if they break rules. 

A prison is not a five star hotel. Prisoners are regularly reminded how awful they are, they barely get good food to eat, living in a 24/7 cell makes them mentally fragile and so they are easily inclined to follow jail rules and policies. In fact many times prisoners are raped, abused and tortured in the most inhumane ways because they have nobody to defend them. 

Victims are a part of Vulnerable groups. But so are prisoners. The level of prison abuse is simply unthinkable 

Imagine if someone was raised to be a  psychopath by their awful upbringing and then their fucked up psyche caused them to commit crimes and they were caught and punished and tortured, raped by prison guards and abused by the system. 

It's like the cycle of abuse never ends and there is zero chance to being a better person. 

Do you realize that they absolutely had zero chance at a better life, that they were first abused by society and then abused by the prison system with absolutely no escape from this abusive cycle? 

Why shouldn't they deserve a chance to improve? 

So does that mean that a rapist will always be a rapist, a thief will always remain a thief, a murderer will always be a murderer? 

Where is the space for healing and change? 

If you think that someone who is a psychopath is impossible to adapt, change or become a better person then your thinking is very moralistic,, Judgmental, stage Blue Hitlerian and very myopic. 

This is one of the reasons why I hate stage Blue. 

It's so purely moralistic unempathetic and dogmatic. 

 

Edited September 4, 2022 by Tyler Robinson

[r0ckyreed]

Best Arguments Against Death Penalty

It saves money to keep prisoners alive.

It allows us to exonerate wrongfully convicted. It is better to let a guilty man go than take away an innocents freedom.

But most of all, life in prison is more torture for the prisoner. Death is an easy way out that we will all do. Why not let the prisoner sit by themselves with their own messed up mind for 40 years.

Give them the feeling of having their freedom taken the same way they took away they took away the freedoms of the people they killed.

Why not throw in a little torture every now and then as well. You cannot torture someone when they are dead. ?

 

The downsides of death penalty are that it costs money, innocent can die, and the prisoner gets a fast free ticket to God (A.K.A death) for the crimes they committed, which means that they never experience the feeling of pain for living with themselves for the crimes they committed. 

If reincarnation is true and if death is an illusion (as Leo states), then the death penalty is bullshit because you are just letting them continue their sins into the next life without suffering them fully in this one. 

Edit: After all, what is the death penalty if there is no death?

Edited September 4, 2022 by r0ckyreed

[AtheisticNonduality]

1 hour ago, Danioover9000 said:

A.I that is hyper intelligent decides who to spare or not for the greater good.

????????????????????????????????????????????????

[Tyler Robinson]

Just now, r0ckyreed said:

Why not throw in a little torture every now and then as well. You cannot torture someone when they are dead. 

 

 

 

This is sadistic thinking sorry. This makes us worse than the criminal. 

I would  forgive a man even if he raped me. 

I would only hope that he would realize what he did to me was painful. 

But under no circumstances would I want him tortured. 

That's an absolute no. 

 

[Jacob Morres]

@Leo Gura how do u deal with false convictions with that swift of a penalty? 

[r0ckyreed]

17 minutes ago, Tyler Robinson said:

 

 

 

This is sadistic thinking sorry. This makes us worse than the criminal. 

I would  forgive a man even if he raped me. 

I would only hope that he would realize what he did to me was painful. 

But under no circumstances would I want him tortured. 

That's an absolute no. 

 

That’s why I had the wink emoji ? in there because it is a joke. But in a sense we are torturing prisoners whether you like it or not just by putting them in a cell. You may call it indirect torture, but torture is still torture. Not all torture is physical. What I argue is that psychological torture is worse.

If you are against torture, then maybe you should consider the death penalty option because that’s what life in prison is doing. The prisoners torture each other and themselves and don’t forget the corrupt guards.

The Fugitive Movie with Harrison Ford and The Central Park 5 convinced me that death penalty isn’t a good idea.

Edit: I respect your level of forgiveability.

Edited September 4, 2022 by r0ckyreed

[zurew]

5 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Here's my question to you Greenies: If Osama Bin Laden or Hitler were captured alive, would you give them life in prison?

I still don't see how you see your system more reasonable, where you allow the government to kill people based on just a quick fabricated evidence, with no further investigation. 

 

But to answer your question, in those extremely special and extremely rare cases the answer would be to kill those people, because it would be proven ,that they have a repeating history of killing way too many people without no change. But how many Osamas and Hitlers are out there? You don't need a whole justice system change or death penalty to be able to kill extremely outrageous people the military takes care of it anyway , because imo its okay to kill people, when it comes to self protection or to save people from being killed - for instance if a person with bombs attached on  him starts running into a building full of people, its justified to kill that person because its almost compeletely obvious that he has harmful intentions and will kill a lot of people.

Again, you would trade a aton of innocent human life unnecessarily to be able to kill murderers based on littile to no evidence. Your threshold wouldn't be Hitler or Osama, your threshold to kill a person would be much much lower , I suspect.

 

I also think its short sited and lazy to try to use "you greenies" and equating caring about human life with just only green. You system would hand out kills way too easily, and if its taken at its face value, at best it would be considered as orange. The values you are building from are stage blue and orange -trading human lifes for finance and talking about justice (while completely ignoring all the circumstances what brought that person there,  why he/she did the murder, How do we create these criminals ,not caring about investigating murder cases deeply, completely ignoring the fact that a lot of innocent people will be killed unnecessarily by the result of your "justice" system, etc) 

@Leo Gura Your system is not yellow at all, because it compeletely lacks stage green values, and you trying to handwave away the proctection of innocent lives just as green, when literally in almost all justice system the most serious and worst thing you can do is to take a human's life.

The point here is not to protect all human lives at all cost, the point is to make a solid case and being able to justify if its necessary - why to take that humans life. Imo your justification is weak and it creates more harm than good.

 

@Leo GuraHere is a question for you: Would you be okay with the governemnt killing your daugther and or killing your whole family just by them being wrongly accused of doing something?

Edited September 4, 2022 by zurew

[Bobby_2021]

Death is by far, more merciful than rotting in a cell with dangerous psychopaths.

Death is liberation. And people don't know how hard prison is, especially for serious offenders. You will be picked on and tortured by other inmates depending in how serious your alleged crime is. Imagine going through this while being innocent. 

If I was convicted after being innocent I would choose death rather than prison. 

[zurew]

5 minutes ago, Bobby_2021 said:

Death is by far, more merciful than rotting in a cell with dangerous psychopaths.

If thats the case, then this point weakens the justice part of the death penalty side.

[King Merk]

Intuitively it never seemed just to me that the penalty for murdering someone can be 10 or even 25 years in prison.

How would you feel if someone killed someone you loved and got away with only losing 20 years of their life?

I’m no Christian but I think there’s some deep wisdom in this Bible verse…

Leviticus 24:19-22
“If a man injures his neighbor, just as he has done, so it shall be done to him: fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth; just as he has injured a man, so it shall be inflicted on him. Thus the one who kills an animal shall make it good, but the one who kills a man shall be put to death“

[TheAlchemist]

@Leo Gura how about countries where the death penalty has been abolished for many decades or even a century already? That is most nations of the world.

Should the death penalty be brought back there?

Maybe some societies produce less extreme criminals, school shooters and serial killers per capita than the USA? So by killing them off, it haves us miss out understanding the phenomenon better by studying those most extreme people, and how systems could be put in palce to reduce the amount of people that end up raging against humanity. 

Edited September 4, 2022 by TheAlchemist

[zurew]

8 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

when enough evidence is gathered that they clearly have intent for degeneracy, and harm to others, and strong desire to continue until death regardless.

This is where your argument about valueing finance automatically fails. Collecting "enough evidence" is much much more expensive than life time prison.

8 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

and other people that have to manage and deal with such evil for decades at risk of getting hurt or killed,

This argument just doesn't work. If you would value human life and human beings getting harmed, then you wouldn't be okay with innocent people being killed. The trade there is just bad if you want to value human life.

Why would you risk making a system where a lot of innocent people will be harmed and will be killed, when most of the people who you would want to sentence to death, would be killed by military or police otherwise anyway, because those poeple are more than likely to run into situations where killing them would be justified under the current laws.

You are trying to optimize death penalty for a very very niche set of people, and at the same time by doing that you automatically open up the door to harm a lot of innocent people.

8 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

materials for the construction of each part of a prison facility

Do you really think, that most people who are in prison are people who you want to sentence to death? The answer is an obvious no, so this argument doesn't work either, because its not the case that by you start doing death penalty all or most prison facility construction will sees to exist, and again its more expensive to kill those people.

 

Edited September 4, 2022 by zurew

[zurew]

6 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

Stage yellow has ascended tier 1 cognition, and operates above it in tier 2 cognition, and is above the moralizing games of the stages like many posts if triggered users ub this thread denonstrate clearly.

To be honest,  your "I am preteneding to be tier 2" posts are hilarious. Most of your posts are not saying anything tier 2 at all, and just repeating the same points over an over again like:

Quote

 It depends on one's value systems, cognitive and moral development, personality, states of being, life experiences and other lines of development, worldview, and the type of mind you have and its biases and which sense making apparatus it prefers.

and at the end of the day you don't address any of the underlying issues or arguments.

6 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

A.I that is hyper intelligent decides who to spare or not for the greater good.

Takes like this shows, that you haven't thought this topic through.

Edited September 4, 2022 by zurew

[Girzo]

Quote

 

It saves resources which can be used to improve the lives of people who need it.

This is really a resource allocation issue. Simple as that. There is no point taking care of an asshole for 40 years.

 

How does that compute with your belief that the Earth can sustain 100 billion humans or something? 

 

7 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

I strongly suspect that even if you could identify criminals with 100% certainty, Greens who are anti death penalty would still not support the death penalty. Because it's an ideological stance, not a pragmatic one.

It's a stance of integrity. I am not a killer and, I wouldn't want a system that forces anyone to become an executioner. It's not a matter of being Green, it's hard to find a doctor to administer the lethal dose even with Blue or Orange values system.

There is relative harm in putting someone in prison, but it's somewhat reversible, not always, but sometimes. Death penalty is absolute harm, there's no undo button.

[at_anchor]

Death penalty is actually more humane than jail time. It's the difference between quick and easy death and long and painful one.

[trenton]

I will do my best to steel man Leo's position in favor of the death penalty for the sake of argument.

In the society Leo envisions, the criminal justice system is mostly focused on rehabilitation because imprisonment is incredibly inefficient. In fact imprisoning criminals can psychologically damage them, making them even more violent, increasing the likelihood of recidivism. In this way our current criminal justice system is poor at preventing crime. Our society should be effective at preventing crime because it is inefficient to rehabilitate everybody.

In Leo's society, many of the crimes are prevented because there would be no more heavy metals in our food and water causing brain damage, wealth inequality and homelessness would be reduced, and spirituality and emotional mastery would be taught to children at a young age. For the most part this would prevent violent crimes worthy of the death penalty. For example, sometimes school shooters are discovered to have brain damage, and when the brain damage is corrected, they no longer have the desire to kill a dozens of children. This would be a controversial case for the death penalty if the man could plead insanity because heavy metals damaged his brain and caused him to do it.

When rehabilitating criminals some criminals are too far gone. Psychedelics may increase compassion for some people, but for others they have no effect, or they even embolden people who have no desire to change who they are. In this way the death penalty can either serve as a deterrent or a necessary solution to a dangerous criminal. For example, Leo would give a criminal in rehabilitation an ultimatum. Either change who you are or else your gonna die.

I remember sadhguru made similar arguments about justice being too slow. He points out that many people claim they would be compassionate and forgive a murderer, but if the murderer raped your daughter, cut your spouse in peices, and burned everyone in your family alive while cutting off your fingers one at time while laughing, then you would have a different opinion of the death penalty. A similar crime actually took place in America before. There are many criminals who would gladly do these things again if not for the death penalty. Sadhguru argued that justice is too slow for a man who clearly raped and murdered somebody. The family is then forced to relive all of the events dozens of times in a court with an excessively long appeals process.

Leo's position is controversial because of the corruption of the criminal justice system. Although in a different society it would make sense to have the death penalty, we are currently dealing with a criminal justice system that hurts blacks more than it does whites as highlighted in "the new Jim Crow." The war on drugs has made our prisons overcrowded when though there are many medical benefits to marijuana and psychedelics. The death penalty has been suspended before. For example in 1972, the supreme court struck down the death penalty for four years because of how dysfunctional the criminal justice system was. 1976, the problems with jury selection were resolved and the death penalty was reinstated.

If the death penalty were suspended in our current society to address the corruption of the criminal justice system, then it could fix a lot of the problems we currently face. This includes prosecutorial misconduct, mass incarceration, racist sentencing, federal judges who fail to refuse themselves when they hold stocks in a company involved in the case, misleading plea bargains, our dependence on plea bargains, failure to inform citizens of their rights, treating people like felons even when they are found innocent, and the fact that innocent people can sit on death row for 40 years even when they are known to be innocent. The last on is major because people lose faith in the death penalty when innocent people are too frequently killed for crimes they didn't commit. This is a problem as bad as the biased jury selection to ensure the death penalty.

Maybe the death penalty could be suspended for about five years then reinstated if sufficient progress is made.